On Mon, 21 Feb 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005, Russell King wrote:
> >
> > In cs.c, alloc_io_space(), find the line:
> >
> > if (*base & ~(align-1)) {
> >
> > delete the ~ and rebuild. This may resolve your problem.
>
> Unlikely. The code is too broken for words.
The original code is correct; you are misinterpreting the meaning of
the "align" variable here. PCMCIA cards can request a specific base
IO address, and can also specify how many IO address lines they
decode. The number of decoded lines determines a maximal alignment
restriction for a card; if it only decodes 3 lines, then it should not
reasonably ask for an IO region with more specificity than being on an
8 port boundary. The "align" variable here holds this alignment. The
"oddness" here is that the card is providing conflicting information,
that it needs IO ports at a specific address, but is only decoding 3
address lines (i.e. align=8).
The names of "base" and "align" have the expected meanings when a card
only specifies one or the other. It's only for the case where both
are specified that the meaning is complicated. Then, "base" is more
like an offset into a block that has "align" alignment
Given an "odd" request for a base=0x260 and align=8, the allocator
promotes this to align=0x400, and would allow addresses 0x260, 0x660,
0xa60, 0xe60, etc, subject to restrictions in /etc/pcmcia/config.opts.
The real problem here is that all the IO address ranges the card
claims to support were unavailable. I'd first try adding:
include port 0x0600-0x07ff
to /etc/pcmcia/config.opts to give the allocator more flexibility in
choosing port ranges.
-- Dave
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
